From pingou at pingoured.fr Wed Jun 3 13:09:00 2009 From: pingou at pingoured.fr (Pierre-Yves) Date: Wed, 03 Jun 2009 15:09:00 +0200 Subject: [Fedora-r-devel-list] R2spec and version number In-Reply-To: <200905291053.58554.jamatos@fc.up.pt> References: <1243576434.2655.7.camel@localhost.localdomain> <200905291053.58554.jamatos@fc.up.pt> Message-ID: <1244034540.19270.21.camel@localhost.localdomain> On Fri, 2009-05-29 at 10:53 +0100, Jos? Matos wrote: > On Friday 29 May 2009 06:53:54 Pierre-Yves wrote: > > Dear all, > > > > I would like your opinion regarding: [Bug 503108] New: R2spec-2.5.2 > > loses Version information > > > > It basically says that when the package version is 2.3-50 R2spec only > > retrieve 2.3 as being the version number. > > To me and based on the packages R-abind, R-acepack, R-mAR (and some > > other that I didn't list) this is not a bug. > > > > Do you agree with me ? > > I agree that we are loosing information in the version and that on the other > hand the dash is just a fancy replacement for the dot. > > So we could agree to replace all the dashes in R package versions by dots and > be done with it. > > Whatever we decide we should apply this uniformly to all R packages that have > this numbering. Thanks for the feedback Jos? :) Spot, does the guideline say something about this ? Should they ? Should we bring the discussion to a broader audience ? Regards, Pierre From martyn.plummer at r-project.org Wed Jun 3 16:50:36 2009 From: martyn.plummer at r-project.org (Martyn Plummer) Date: Wed, 03 Jun 2009 18:50:36 +0200 Subject: [Fedora-r-devel-list] R2spec and version number In-Reply-To: <1244034540.19270.21.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1243576434.2655.7.camel@localhost.localdomain> <200905291053.58554.jamatos@fc.up.pt> <1244034540.19270.21.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <1244047836.9709.76.camel@localhost.localdomain> On Wed, 2009-06-03 at 15:09 +0200, Pierre-Yves wrote: > On Fri, 2009-05-29 at 10:53 +0100, Jos? Matos wrote: > > On Friday 29 May 2009 06:53:54 Pierre-Yves wrote: > > > Dear all, > > > > > > I would like your opinion regarding: [Bug 503108] New: R2spec-2.5.2 > > > loses Version information > > > > > > It basically says that when the package version is 2.3-50 R2spec only > > > retrieve 2.3 as being the version number. > > > To me and based on the packages R-abind, R-acepack, R-mAR (and some > > > other that I didn't list) this is not a bug. > > > > > > Do you agree with me ? > > > > I agree that we are loosing information in the version and that on the other > > hand the dash is just a fancy replacement for the dot. > > > > So we could agree to replace all the dashes in R package versions by dots and > > be done with it. > > > > Whatever we decide we should apply this uniformly to all R packages that have > > this numbering. > > Thanks for the feedback Jos? :) > > Spot, does the guideline say something about this ? > Should they ? > Should we bring the discussion to a broader audience ? > > Regards, > Pierre For R, there is no difference between "-" and "." in package version numbers. Here is what the R Extension manual says: "The version is a sequence of at least two (and usually three) non-negative integers separated by single ?.? or ?-? characters. The canonical form is as shown in the example [0.5-1 - Martyn], and a version such as ?0.01? or ?0.01.0? will be handled as if it were ?0.1-0?." So you should just replace dashes with dots. Martyn ----------------------------------------------------------------------- This message and its attachments are strictly confidential. If you are not the intended recipient of this message, please immediately notify the sender and delete it. Since its integrity cannot be guaranteed, its content cannot involve the sender's responsibility. Any misuse, any disclosure or publication of its content, either whole or partial, is prohibited, exception made of formally approved use ----------------------------------------------------------------------- From tcallawa at redhat.com Wed Jun 3 21:07:19 2009 From: tcallawa at redhat.com (Tom "spot" Callaway) Date: Wed, 03 Jun 2009 17:07:19 -0400 Subject: [Fedora-r-devel-list] R2spec and version number In-Reply-To: <1244047836.9709.76.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1243576434.2655.7.camel@localhost.localdomain> <200905291053.58554.jamatos@fc.up.pt> <1244034540.19270.21.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1244047836.9709.76.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <4A26E607.90401@redhat.com> On 06/03/2009 12:50 PM, Martyn Plummer wrote: > For R, there is no difference between "-" and "." in package version > numbers. Here is what the R Extension manual says: > > "The version is a sequence of at least two (and usually three) > non-negative integers separated by single ?.? or ?-? characters. The > canonical form is as shown in the example [0.5-1 - Martyn], and a > version such as ?0.01? or ?0.01.0? will be handled as if it were > ?0.1-0?." > > So you should just replace dashes with dots. Based on that, I'd say we should be embedding the whole version (with dot, not dash). Pretty much every R package is going to need to be fixed for this, include the core R. ~spot From pingou at pingoured.fr Thu Jun 4 05:52:28 2009 From: pingou at pingoured.fr (Pierre-Yves) Date: Thu, 04 Jun 2009 07:52:28 +0200 Subject: [Fedora-r-devel-list] R2spec and version number In-Reply-To: <4A26E607.90401@redhat.com> References: <1243576434.2655.7.camel@localhost.localdomain> <200905291053.58554.jamatos@fc.up.pt> <1244034540.19270.21.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1244047836.9709.76.camel@localhost.localdomain> <4A26E607.90401@redhat.com> Message-ID: <1244094748.3272.0.camel@red.localdomain> On Wed, 2009-06-03 at 17:07 -0400, Tom "spot" Callaway wrote: > On 06/03/2009 12:50 PM, Martyn Plummer wrote: > > > For R, there is no difference between "-" and "." in package version > > numbers. Here is what the R Extension manual says: > > > > "The version is a sequence of at least two (and usually three) > > non-negative integers separated by single ?.? or ?-? characters. The > > canonical form is as shown in the example [0.5-1 - Martyn], and a > > version such as ?0.01? or ?0.01.0? will be handled as if it were > > ?0.1-0?." > > > > So you should just replace dashes with dots. > > Based on that, I'd say we should be embedding the whole version (with > dot, not dash). Pretty much every R package is going to need to be fixed > for this, include the core R. I'd also propose that we put a small note on the packaging guidelines :) Thanks all, Pierre From pingou at pingoured.fr Thu Jun 11 22:52:13 2009 From: pingou at pingoured.fr (Pierre-Yves) Date: Fri, 12 Jun 2009 00:52:13 +0200 Subject: [Fedora-r-devel-list] [Fwd: [R-sig-Fedora] License quandry in the Fedora sub-space of all R packages] Message-ID: <1244760733.7027.9.camel@red.localdomain> Dear list, It seems that the address used originally for this mail was wrong there is therefore a forward from the r-sig-fedora mailing list. Regards, Pierre -------------- next part -------------- An embedded message was scrubbed... From: R P Herrold Subject: [R-sig-Fedora] License quandry in the Fedora sub-space of all R packages Date: Wed, 10 Jun 2009 15:21:50 -0400 (EDT) Size: 10733 URL: